Generalize Decodable impl for arrays to all types - #160111
Open
panstromek wants to merge 1 commit into
Open
Conversation
Collaborator
|
r? @mu001999 rustbot has assigned @mu001999. Use Why was this reviewer chosen?The reviewer was selected based on:
|
Collaborator
|
The job Click to see the possible cause of the failure (guessed by this bot) |
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
This is almost the only impl that is not symetric with its Encodable counterpart. I tried to find out why in the history but it looks like this impl predates most of the generic symetric ones that are in this file, so it looks like it's not intentional.
I bumped into this randomly by changing a Vec to an array in some Mir types. The error was pretty confusing and It took me a while to figure out so I think it's worth generalizing this for somebody else in the future, even though it's technically not necessary at the moment.
We piggyback off of
SmallVecimpl to avoid adding aDefaultbound orMaybeUninitunsafe dance. This moves the assert to the loop.